Barack Obama accepted the Democratic nomination for president by giving a speech that managed to bring the head-in-the-clouds mood of the convention back to the grind of governing.

“I’m no longer just a candidate. I’m the President,” said Obama, and it wasn’t a boast but a reality check.

Obama talked just how humbling an experience being president is. “And while I’m proud of what we’ve achieved together,” Obama said, “I’m far more mindful of my own failings, knowing exactly what Lincoln meant when he said, ‘I have been driven to my knees many times by the overwhelming conviction that I had no place else to go.'”

That said, Obama made it very clear that the election is a choice about two different visions. (By contrast, the Republicans originally wanted the election to be a referendum on Obama’s job performance, but having Paul Ryan play the Brain to Mitt Romney’s Pinky scotched that idea.) Most of the time, Obama talked about the long road toward change, which is just starting. “I won’t pretend the path I’m offering is quick or easy. I never have. You didn’t elect me to tell you what you wanted to hear,” Obama said. “You elected me to tell you the truth. And the truth is, it will take more than a few years for us to solve challenges that have built up over decades.”

Nonentheless, the convention was an incredibly well-managed and well-messaged event. (Remember, we’re talking about Democrats here, the party of chaos theory.) There was demonstrably more energy among the delegates than there were among Republicans in Tampa. And the messages were consistent throughout: Democrats have a “we’re all in this together” vision of the future, while Republicans are focused solely on helping the wealthy. The Democrats also presented specific policy ideas, and as Joe Biden reminded the convention, pointed to Obama’s successes that offered reason to support those ideas. It was also a new, muscular party, one that showed no compunction attacking Republicans and boasting of its support of gays and lesbians.

Neither convention was a game changer for either party, but for Republicans that’s the problem. They really need to shake things up in the two months before the election. The election looks close, but it still looks better for Obama. Republicans need a compelling reason for voters to break their way, and they’ve yet to come up with it. The best they could hope for was that disappointment in Obama would dampen his turnout. But if the Democrats can stay as fired up as they were in Charlotte, that narrows Romney’s path to victory even further. Sixty days can be an eternity in politics, but for the Republicans, it may not be long enough to turn things around.

If Obama and Romney were in a Presidential Debate will Rocky Anderson, Jill Stein, and Gary Johnson they would lose as America would see the contrast between the 2pparty system charade of war, poverty and erosion of civil liberties and candidates who are pro-peace, pro-worker, and pro civil liberties.

“Democrats have a “we’re all in this together” vision of the future, while Republicans are focused solely on helping the wealthy.”

Yeah, because idiot Bush never went along with the catastrophic Community Reinvestment Act concept that Carter invented in 1977 and was pushed forward under Clinton in the 90’s that was a HUGE reason that caused the economic collapse in 2008. Forcing banks to operate under relaxed standards to extend mortgages to people who never should have qualified. (Along with Clinton’s repealing of the part of the Glass–Steagall Act that didn’t allow banks to co-mingle risky investments with “banking”.)

George W. Bush was a major proponent of the kind of mortgages that banks had started making under the CRA and was responsible for the relaxation of the mortgage requirements. He urged low-to-no doc mortgages and the elimination of downpayments, just like the CRA regulators had long done. “We certainly don’t want there to be a fine print preventing people from owning their home,” the President said in a 2002 speech. “We can change the print, and we’ve got to.”

And Bush never agreed to the stupid extension of Medicare to pay for prescription drugs in 2003 with a Republican Senate and House. It was 2 REPUBLICANS who finally voted yes which pushed the vote to a YEA. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Trent Lott (R-MS.

Enrollment in 25 major government programs – including health care, college aid and food stamps – surged an average of 17 percent from 2000 to 2005, while the nation’s population increased by only 5 percent.

It marked the largest 5-year growth in enrollment since Medicare, Medicaid and other social programs were created during Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” movement in the 1960s. UNDER BUSH.

“The Democrats also presented specific policy ideas”

Really. Which ones?

“1 Million new jobs in manufacturing”. Wow that’s really specific. “Spending more on education”. WOW.

Come on Queerty, stick to what you’re good at and stop making generalized statements that have no factual basis unless you count talking points on MSNBC.

Conservatives are furious at Bush for his big spending. Especially on government nanny state programs. The country was founded with a principle of NO INCOME TAX until 1913 FFS. What we have here is a fundamental difference of opinion over if people should be forced to give their money to complete strangers and if government has the right to dictate how we should live (as in forcing new mothers in NY hospitals to listen to lectures and pressuring them against bottle feeding, and passing laws limiting salt, sugar etc for christ sakes)

@doug105: don’t bother arguing with people with his mindset. Eventually he will grow up and start living in the real world, until then we just have to hope they don’t actually influence others to not vote for Obama.

”
Yeah, because idiot Bush never went along with the catastrophic Community Reinvestment Act concept that Carter invented in 1977 and was pushed forward under Clinton in the 90?s that was a HUGE reason that caused the economic collapse in 2008.”
____________

I see you’ve been reading the talking points. But no, actually the wealthier people trying to flip 5 houses houses because of the huge real estate bubble helped along with Greenspans miscalculations had a much larger part than some family making $40,000 a year paying a mortgage on one house. When real estate prices leveled off they all went bankrupt.

As for Jeff4 Justice. Oh gee, what a shock, another article about politics on here and here you come with your little Log Cabin talking point that seem to leave out anything about gay rights and the GOP.

Please list out Romney’s comparisons to Obama on gay issues….since, you know, this is a gay blog. Oh wait, you Log Cabiners don’t want to because it becomes obvious that you have become an anti-gay group trying to support a party that wants to strip our civil rights away.

Sep 7, 2012 at 10:28 am · @Reply ·

Neo

@Cam: He isn’t a log cabiner, he’s a conspiracy fringe nutcase. If you look at his blog it’s all Illuminati this, Bilderbergs, Council of Five, lizard men etcetera.

He’s a nutter, only a slightly different and a lot less dangerous to morality and intelligence than republican extremists as people tend to grow out of conspiracy theories as they grow older.